Budget solution: Deadlines with penalties, stay until deal reached.

October 23, 2009|By Rep. Doug Reichley Special to The Morning Call - Freelance

With the passage of the final piece of budget legislation on the 101st day after our constitutional deadline, the natural reaction is to look back and try to determine not only why this stalemate went on for three months, but how we can avoid such a calamity in the future.

First, why did it take so long to get the budget finalized? A number of constituents expressed frustration that the legislators were "not working together." House Republicans made it very clear we were against tax increases during the midst of the worst economy in 70 years. The governor liked to rail against the Legislature for not working with him earlier to avoid our budget showdown, but the governor himself did not announce his proposed income tax increase until the second week in June, just days before our constitutional budget deadline of June 30. In addition, House Democrats, who are in majority control of the House, refused to bring the budget bill up for a floor vote until the second week in July.

Why all the gamesmanship? It comes down to one simple question: Do you support tax increases? For many months, House Republicans made it clear we opposed tax hikes. In light of our opposition to such increases, when the budget stalemate dragged on into August, we offered our proposal to cut spending by $700 million from last year for a final spending figure of $27.5 billion. This budget would have cut overall state spending, but also provided an increase in state funding for school districts to avoid property tax increases. Even more impressive, we were able to formulate this budget proposal without a single tax increase on either individuals or businesses.

Based on our opposition to any tax increases, House Republicans were excluded from budget negotiations held by the three other caucuses and the governor. However, when the budget was finally passed with an overall spending figure of $27.8 billion, we House Republicans feel vindicated because the budget submitted for final approval was just $300 million above what we proposed. This figure is also nearly $400 million less than the $28.2 billion spent last year, and a full $1 billion less than what the governor and House Democrats wanted to spend in this fiscal year.

As we proceed into discussions for the next fiscal year in just a few months, we will again have to exercise fiscal discipline to avoid imposing higher taxes on our residents. To avoid a similar calamity from reoccurring, I have proposed legislation to require a budget timeline to help prevent protracted budget impasses as we saw this year.

My proposal would encourage an earlier start to bipartisan agreements between all parties by imposing specific deadlines, by which the House, Senate and the governor must act or lose the right to enter into contracts and award grants until their job is done. In addition, we would be required to remain in continuous session to resolve the budget if we have not met our constitutional deadline of June 30. One lesson learned from this stalemate is that legislators and the governor must stay in Harrisburg until the budget is resolved.

State Rep. Doug Reichley represents the 134th District of Pennsylvania, which includes Lehigh County and parts of Berks County.